on 01-26-2015 12:09 PM
Hi,
I have scenario where the posted figure for work centre does not match the activity type figure(KP26) for example
In S_ALR_87013545 report there is a posted figure of £1680 to a network when I drill-down into the figure I can see the network confirmation with 7 hours booked using activity ADMIN from the work centre I can see the cost centre of ADMIN.
Using KP26 I can see the rate of £40. Therefore I would have a posting of £280 (7*40) not £1680, does anyone know why I would have this posting? I have checked KP26 on the change log and there have not been any recent changes to the rates.
I would add that the incorrect figures are only for 1 employee, others link to the same work centre and activity type and they are posting correctly - ie the correct rate of £40 is used.
thanks
Joe
Issue resolved - incorrect figures maintained in the period screen of KP26
thanks for all your help.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi,
Would you be able to differentiate the postings in CJI3 for Business Transaction RKL and RKLN or table RPSCO with budget type RKL and RKLN.
Please ensure that CJN1/CJN2 is not executed in your system.
Hope it Helps!
Thanks and Regards,
Varshal Kachole
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Joe,
You can run CJEN followed by CJBN to reconstruct project info database and remove any report inconsistencies.
Apart from that, can you please share pricing screen (KP26) where you maintained this rate and the t-code screen where you posted this actual data to project wbs.
Thanks
Saurabh
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Joe,
Is there any cancellation occurred ? We have a inconsistency note for cancellation of documents.
Also go to CJI3 and check with respect to posting dates, see whether it matches with your CAT2 entry.
Regards
Terence
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Joe,
Can you please run transaction CJEN to correct this?
If this does not correct this, can you please check the value category
customizing according to the following settings:
1) In transaction CJVC, all yellow and/or red lights have to eliminated
by assigning each cost element/commitment item/statistical key figure
according to the following rules:
1.1) Each cost element/commitment item/statistical key figure should
be assigned to a value category, EVEN if its values should NOT
be updated to table Project Information Database, table RPSCO.
In this case please create an assignment to a value category
and activate its 'suppress' indicator. All values basing on an
assignment to this value category won't be updated to RPSCO.
1.2) Each cost element/commitment item/stat. key figure has to be
assigned exactly once to a value category. Assigning them to
more or less than one value category will lead to unpredictable
results.
1.3) Only
1.3.1) cost elements of the same cost element type,
1.3.2) commitment items of the same item category and
1.3.3) statistical key figures of the same unit of measure
and the same KF category
are allowed to be assigned to one value category. Mixed assignments
will lead to unpredictable results, like mixing costs and revenues in
columns or rows.
2) If all yellow and/or red lights in transaction CJVC are eliminated,
please rebuild the Project Information Database (table RPSCO) by
transaction CJEN. Without this, changes from 1.1)-1.3) won't have
any effect.
3) Please rebuild the assigned values by transaction CJBN.
BR,
Enrique
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
88 | |
7 | |
6 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 | |
2 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.